Frank Farley (1981) suggests that open-space classrooms, open discus sion, discovery, and inductive modes of instruction arc ideally suited for students.
Introverts and Extraverts Require Different Learning Environments A learning environment stimulating enough for extraverted students may be too stimulating for introverted students (and for the teacher).
RONALD R. SCHMECK AND DAN LOCKHART
O
ne issue routinely faced by school administrators is the de gree to which a school system should adapt to the needs of individual students and the degree to which the student should be forced to adapt to the needs of the system, which is designed for the "average" student. Some aspects of students' learning styles are modifi able (Schmeck 1981). Thus, teachers can bend a little to meet the needs of a particular student's style while simulta neously trying to shape that style into one they believe to be more efficient. However, if the individual difference is not modifiable, then we have a special problem. If we try to change students in ways they cannot change, then we do them a great disservice. One such indi vidual difference may be the introversion-extraversion personality dimen sion. Introversion-extraversion has been identified as a reliable dimension of personality by at least two of the most famous researchers in the field of per sonality psychology: Raymond Cattell and Hans Eysenck. Both of these re searchers use sophisticated statistical methods to define personality and both have created personality tests that they 54
believe measure personality constructs similar to introversion-extraversion. Eysenck's test is called the Eysenck Person ality Questionnaire; Cartells is called the Sixteen Personality Factor Ques tionnaire (or 16 PF).' At present, the most commonly ac cepted theory for explaining individual differences on the dimension of intro version-extraversion is provided by Ey senck (Blass, 1977; Eysenck and Claridge, 1962; Prentsky, 'l979). Eyscnck's theory places great emphasis on the assumption that there are i nherited d if ferences between people in the ways their nervous systems function. Intro verts are assumed to have such weak neural inhibition that stimulation of the senses easily prompts activity in the brain, while extraverts have strong neu ral inhibition, which makes it more difficult for sensory stimulation to acti vate the brain. In other words, because it takes very little stimulation for introverts to per ceive a stimulus, their brains become easily overstimulated. Thus, they tend to seek out an environmental where there is relatively little stimulation. Ex traverts, on the other hand, require strong stimulation to perceive a stimulus
and tend to seek out environments that provide relatively large amounts of stim ulation. Research with identical twins (Shields, 1976) has supported Eyscnck's assumption that a person's position on the introversion-extraversion continu um is determined by heredity and thus not very subject to change. Introverts are more influenced by punishments than by rewards, and they arc more sensitive than extraverts to social prohibitions. All of this tends to make the introvert more restrained and inhibited. Furthermore, introverts are more sensitive than extraverts to pain, more prone to fatigue, and their per formance suffers more when they are excited. This should not be taken to
Ronald R. Schmeck is Professor of Psycholo gy, Southern Illinois University at Carbondale; and Dan Lockhart is Psychologist, Sci ence Applications, Inc , Kansas City, Missouri
EDUCATIONAL LEADERSHIP
indicate that introverts earn lower grades than extraverts in school; research indi cates just the opposite. It seems likely that many classrooms reward the student who works quietly and alone (Bichlcr, 1978). This is prob ably due to the fact that most teachers are more introverted than most of their students. Research has shown that peo ple tend to become more introverted as they grow older. Since teachers are al ways older than their students, they will also tend, in general, to be more intro verted . Implications for Teachers
The implications of Kyscncks theory for the teacher arc that extravcrtcd children will learn better and understand the material better when learning occurs in an environment that is very stimulating (perhaps more stimulating than an in troverted teacher can stand). Introverted children, on the other hand, may learn best in an environment that is quiet and free from intense stimulation. For ex ample, although introverted children do not dislike people, they are over-stimu lated by too much contact with others and thus prefer to study alone. Extraverts, by the same token, do not neces sarily have an excessive need to be with people, but they do tend to seek out the extra stimulation that they can get by studying with others. Such stimulation helps them to concentrate. The extravcrted child should profit from multimedia presentations with sound, bright colors, and frequent changes in topics. The introverted stu dents would profit from repeated em phasis on the main topic of the presenta tion with as little unnecessary distraction as possible. Since cxtravertcd students do not like to sit quietly, they may pursue stimulating activities that disrupt the classroom (and could even be mistakenly labeled hyperactive). These activities send messages to their brains which would be otherwise understimulated. The introverted students, by way of contrast, may seem like the ideal students, sitting quietly, and causing very little "trouble." Frank Farley (1981) suggests that open-space classrooms, open discus sion, discovery, and inductive modes of instruction arc ideally suited for students who need extra stimulation. By the same token, those students who need FEBRUARY 198?
less stimulation are best served by highlystructured learning environments, lec tures, expository and deductive modes of instruction. In one experiment. Farley showed that students who need a lot of stimulation learned faster if they were first shown an example of a problem and then told the rule (inductive approach). Those who needed less stimulation learned faster when they were given the rule first and then shown an example (deductive approach). Appreciating Differences
If you find yourself wanting to say that either the introverted or cxtravcrted be havior pattern is "right or "better." your own behavior probably fits that pattern. As is true of most personality characteristics, it is easiest for introverts to appreciate the style of other introverts and for extraverts to appreciate the style of extraverts. There are some individual differences that teachers should not only tolerate but also put to their best advantage. For example, extravcrted students should periodically be provided with an oppor tunity to discuss the material even if that is not the teacher's normal style. Like wise, introverted students might need periodically to be sheltered from others so they can find the peace they need in order to learn. Perhaps the greatest danger lies in failing to provide a favorable environ ment for the cxtravertcd student. We noted earlier that teachers will invari ably tend to become more introverted than many of their students. Thus, they may become less tolerant toward extraverts. Also, we know that introverts already fare well in our current educa tional system. Thus, we might give a little extra thought to whether our class rooms provide opportunities for the kind of interactive, stimulating learning ex periences that cxtraverted students seem to need. It should be remembered that introvcrsion-extraverson is a continuum and not a dichotomy. One cannot simply divide the class in half and put the introverts into a quiet setting and the extraverts into a more stimulating set ting. Most students are neither totally introverted nor totally cxtravcrtcd. They require both quiet and stimulating learning environments. The challenge thus is one of: (1) providing the majority of students with an environment that
"Perhaps the greatest danger lies in failing to provide a favorable environment for the extroverted student."
may sometintes be too stimulating for the teacher; (2) providing a little extra stimulation for cxtraverted children; and (?) keeping all this stimulation from interfering with the learning of extreme ly introverted children. Creative solu tions arc needed to provide students with a proper level of stimulation while not ovcrstimulating either the teacher or introverted students. D 'The Eyscnck Personality Questionnaire is available from Educational and Industrial Testing Service, P.O. Box ~2?4. San Diego, CA 92107; and the Cattcll Sixteen Personal ity Factor Questionnaire is available from Institute for Personality and Ability Testing, !602Coronado Dr.. Champaign. JL61820.
Bichlcr, R F Psychology Applied to Teaching. Boston: Houghton MitHin, 1978. Blass. T. Persona/try Variables in Social Psychology. New York: Wiley. 1977. Eysenck. H. )., and Claridge. C. "The Position of Hysterics and Dysthymics in a 2Dimcnsional Framework of Personality." Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 64 (1962): 46-55. Farley, F.. and Gordon, N. J. Psychology and Education: The State of the Union. Berkeley. Calif.: McCutchan, 1981. Prcntsky, R A. The Biological Aspects of Normal Personality. Baltimore: University Press. 1979. Schmeck, R. R. "Improving Learning by Improving Thinking." Educational Leader ship ? 8 (February 1981): ?84-?85.
55
Copyright © 1983 by the Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. All rights reserved.
